Re: futimens and utimensat vs birthtime

.. then make it take a struct and a type flag. :P

Then you can extend it however you'd like.



-adrian

On 16 August 2015 at 07:26, Julian Elischer <julian_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 8/15/15 1:39 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
>>
>> On Friday, August 14, 2015 10:46:10 PM Julian Elischer wrote:
>>>
>>> I would like to implement this call. but would like input as to it's
>>> nature.
>>> The code inside the system would already appear to support handling
>>> three elements, though it needs some scrutiny,
>>> so all that is needed is a system call with the ability to set the
>>> birthtime directly.
>>>
>>> Whether it should take the form of the existing calls but expecting
>>> three items is up for discussion.
>>> Maybe teh addition of a flags argument to specify which items are
>>> present and which to set.
>>>
>>> ideas?
>>
>> I believe these should be new calls.  Only utimensat() provides a flag
>> argument, but it is reserved for AT_* flags.
>
> I wasn't suggesting we keep the old ones and silently make them take 3 args
> :-)
> I was thining of suplementing them wth new syscalls and the obvious names
> are those you suggested.
> however I do wonder if there will ever be a need for a 4th...
>
>>   I would be fine with
>> something like futimens3() and utimensat3() (where 3 means "three
>> timespecs").  Jilles implemented futimens() and utimensat(), so he
>> might have ideas as well.  I would probably stick the birth time in
>> the third (final) timespec slot to make it easier to update new code
>> (you can use an #ifdef just around ts[2] without having to #ifdef the
>> entire block).
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"